Wheeling register. [volume] (Wheeling, W. Va.) 1878-1935, 1887-07-19
VAN BAKERS TRIAL.
uTrLR DONE UP AT NEW CUMBERLAND
YESTERDAY.
The Defense Makes a Notion for Change Of fsnue-
Great Excitement Over
the Case.

the UdSe.
The trial of Van B. Baker, charged with
the murder of his wife, Eliza Baker, and
his mother-in-law, Mrs. Drusilla McWha,
was begun at New Cumberland, the eoun-
ty seat of Hancock county, yesterday
morning, before Judge Geo. Z Boyo, ana
in the presence of tremendous crowd Oh
deeply interested spectators, who, despite
the intense heat, crowded the not 100
large court room to suffocation and lis
tened to the prosy ard technical remarks
of counsel with the greatest attention.
The terrible crime with which BAKER
stands charged, committed on Monday
the 9Th of May last, is so fresh IN Inc
minds Of readers Of the REGISTER thst eA-
tended mention of it is not necessary.
Neither is it necessary to recall to nina
the chain of circumstantial evidence which
points so unm istakably to Baker as the
murderer, and which led to his arrest ana
confinement in the Hancock county jail
within forty eight hours after the horrible
crime was made known to the authorities
Of the comfy.
For weeks the trial has been almost the
universal topic of conversation throughout
Brooke and Hancock counties, and the
feeling against the accused is so intense,
particularly in the neighborhood OF Holll-
days Cove, where the double tragedy was
committed, that in the event Of acquittai
there is little doubt tine people will meet
out a summary punishment ifthe object oil
their wrath falls into their hands. For
some time gallows has been standing
near the house where the two women met
their awful death, and upon it is inscribed
the significant legend: "lf Van BAKER
doesn't get justice at New Cumberland, he
will here" This shows the temper OF the
people who were the friends and neiShbors
of the murdered women, and fully vlndi-
Gates the assertion previously made that
trouble will occur in the event OF IN ac-
quittal. ., :
In addition to the unusual atrocity OF
the crimes attributed so unanimously TO
Baker, this is the first murder trial ever
occurring in Hancock county, and this TACT
adds to the deep interest manifested III the
court room yesterday. Baker did not look
nearly so well, as he faced the crowded
court room, as he did upon the day OF his
arrest. The hot weather, the coniine-
ment, and the mental torture to which lie
has been subjected, have all told upon his
physical appearance, aud he looks worn.
His ewes still maintained their old look OF
anxiety, and kept shifting iurtively from
place TO place during the time he was IN
the room. His counsel are all heavy legal
lights, and can be depended upon to make
a stout fight for their client They include
w. ID. Moore, OF Pittsburg; John NJ. Cook,
of Steubenville; John Il. Donehoe, Of New
Cumberland; j. b. Braddock, of Wells
burg, and Col. w. w. Arnett and Judge
Melvin, of this city. 1t is also stated that
Ex-senator ID. w. Voorhees,, Of Indiana,
will come on to speak TO the jury at the
wind up. Prosecuting Attorney, w. j..
Hut, who il young man of much ability
and promise, has for his co counsel, Hon.
John A. Hutchinson, of Parkersburg; Hon.
John McSweeney, OF Wooster, O.. L. s..
Brown, OF Pittsbuig, and James Marshall, of
New Cumberland. Mr.. McSweeney Is n
noted criminal lawyer, and his experience
and ability will be invaluable Ia the State.
Upon the case being called yesterday
morning, the defense, upon the strength
of a. affidavit made by j. W. Plattenburg,
of the Hancock Courier, made a motion for
a change of venue. This was set down Tor
argument in the afternoon, and after din
ner the counsel on either side had an ex-
tended whack ut the point. No decision
was reached. the Court reserying its
opinion.
Mr.. Hutchinson for the State opposed
the granting of the application, stating
that the prisoner was arrested on the 10th
OF May, indicted OH the Goth of June, and
the case set for the 18th of July. The
prosecutor at the time asked that the case
be set at later day, but the defense OBJ
jected, demanding an early trial. saying
that it was ready TO proceed ut once, and
he thought that the application came in
too late TO make the change of venue.
Mr.. Cook thought the affidavit made by
the defense set forth evidence in sufficient
terms TO make change necessary, and
that the defense would stand on this aft
davit and demanded to he heard on the
motion.
The prosecution opposed the change, but
asked that if the Court intended hearing
the motion, that the prosecution he gwen
time 10 prepare counter affidavit, the
preparation of which would require the
attention of the State until four o'clock.
Mr.. Cook said that the defense would
like 10 have the witnesses for the prosecu-
ton examined orally.
Mr.. Hutchinson stated that the prosecn-
ton would file a counter affidavit and that
then if the defense desired the witnesses
could be cross-examined.
Mr. DOnchOo, for the defense stated that
the county was hostile 10 the accused, and
he held that no legal conviction could be
had in Hancock county. He cited deci-
sions to sustain his argument, which set
forth that in case the hostility Of a Sher-
III toward the prisoner, who summoned
the jury, yitated a conviction. The Su'
preme Court of the State held that change
of venue should have been granted under
such circumstances similar 10 those Of the
present case.
Mr.. Hutchinson sad that there was
nothing similar in the two cases. In the
one reported and given by the defense, the
Sheriff took poll of the county To show
its hostility to the accused, which poll
was printed in the Wheeling papers. Ia
the present the Sheriff had done nothing
except prepare the affidavit which charged
Baker with the crime, which was proper.
Among the multitude Of spectators
which were present was over two hundred
witnesses, about equally divided between
the defense and prosecution. The PANEL
Of one hundred jurymen summoned, out
of which the twelve which are TO try the
case are 10 he chosen, was also on hands.
There will doubtless he great trouble 10
procuring a jury, in the event of the mo.
ton for change Of venue being denied,
and the remainder Of the week may he put
in Oh this work. Then, AZ there must he
two distinct trials, under the indictment
found, il is not at all unlikely thst the
trial may extend over three weeks.